The much-expected public hearing being put together by the marine transport committee of the House of Representatives is expected to come up tomorrow (Tuesday, June 26, 2012).
However, feelers of what might come out of the top-rate seating is beginning to emerge, as our correspondent scooped last week that some stakeholders have perfected plans to argue the necessity of including off shore cargoes under the new Cabotage Act.
The much-expected public hearing being put together by the marine transport committee of the House of Representatives is expected to come up tomorrow (Tuesday, June 26, 2012).
However, feelers of what might come out of the top-rate seating is beginning to emerge, as our correspondent scooped last week that some stakeholders have perfected plans to argue the necessity of including off shore cargoes under the new Cabotage Act.
A stakeholder who pleaded anonymity told our correspondent last week that it was regrettable that offshore platforms were not captured by the 2003 Act, but added that members of the committee are already aware of this omission.
‘Under the United States Jones Act which Nigeria copied, operations of offshore platform come under the Jones Act, so I don’t know how we overlooked that, ab initio”, he said.
According to him, the lawmakers have sufficient facts to the effect that the Cabotage Act has left out key areas where offshore operations are increasingly going on and where Nigerians have been largely shut out.
Apart form this, our sources also hinted that there is an intense pressure from fishing trawler owners who believe that they should not be included in the Cabotage Act.
“It is up to the lawmakers, but some of us are of the opinion that they should not be exempted from the Act”, an operator confided in our correspondent last week.
Although it was received with great enthusiasm, industry stakeholders have lamented that the law is still deficient and impossible to implement in favour of local companies.
A section of the draft amendment bill which was sighted by our correspondent however gives a hint as to where the law makers are headed. Specifically, part II of the amendment to the Act prescribed in the clause titled: ‘Restricting of Vessels in Domestic Coastal Trade’, that: “A vessel other than a vessel wholly owned and manned by a Nigerian citizen, built and registered in Nigeria shall not engage in the domestic coastal carriage or cargo and passengers within the coastal, territorial, inland waters, island or any point within the waters of the Exclusive Economic Zone of Nigeria”.
It also adds in clause 4(1) that: “A tug or vessel not wholly owned by a person who is a Nigerian citizen shall not tow any vessel from or to any port or point in Nigerian Waters, or tow any vessel carrying any substance whatsoever, whether of value or not or any dredge material whether or not has commercial value from a port or point within Nigerian waters”.
The amendment bill is sponsored by the deputy speaker of the House, Hon Emeka Ihedioha and the chairman of the committee, Hon Ifeanyi Ugwuanyi.
While leading the debate on the general principles of the amendment bill, chairman of committee on marine transport, had told his coleagues that, “as legislators, we have a duty to contribute our own to the success of the Cabotage Act in order to bring it in line with other international jurisdictions. The Amendment sought will expand jurisdiction to cover all vessels in oil and gas exploration and exploitation activities on or under water, as well as forms of trans-shipment activities within our domestic waters reflecting the trend of our nation’s oil and gas operations”.
He had added that Nigerian stood to reap financial benefits from a well-articulated and implemented Cabotage. One of the ways to generate a substantial chunk of the nation’s revenue is through participation of Nigerians in the huge shipping and logistics services in the oil and gas sector as statistics show that average cargo traffic of 152 million metric tons worth $5billion is generated in freight earnings annually.
“As at today, over 90 percent of this income is earned by foreign shipping companies who deny employment opportunities to our seafarers and refuse to make use of our local ship and refuse to invest in local maritime infrastructure development”, he stressed.
Discussion about this post